Re: [Nbd] [PATCH 1/3] nbd: support FLUSH requests
- To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...696...>
- Cc: nbd-general@...72..., Paul Clements <Paul.Clements@...124...>, linux-kernel@...25...
- Subject: Re: [Nbd] [PATCH 1/3] nbd: support FLUSH requests
- From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...133...>
- Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 13:32:07 -0800
- Message-id: <20130212133207.ef6b24f5.akpm@...133...>
- In-reply-to: <511A8491.5030407@...696...>
- References: <1360685171-3792-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@...696...> <1360685171-3792-2-git-send-email-pbonzini@...696...> <115932E2-48BE-406E-9E75-61D12EB5937A@...872...> <511A8491.5030407@...696...>
On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 19:06:09 +0100
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...696...> wrote:
> Il 12/02/2013 18:37, Alex Bligh ha scritto:
> > For my education, why remove the FUA stuff?
>
> Because I had no way to test it.
>
> >>> > > Hmmm... the underlying storage could be md/dm RAIDs in which case FUA
> >>> > > should be cheaper than FLUSH.
> >> >
> >> > If someone ever wrote a virtio-blk backend that sits directly ontop
> >> > of the Linux block layer that would be true.
> > In this case we don't know what the backend is sitting on top of
> > a-priori. It might be the current nbd server code, but it might
> > not be.
>
> Do you know of any other NBD server than the "official" one and qemu-nbd?
>
Obviously the changelog was inadequate. Please send along a new one
which fully describes the reasons for this change.
Reply to: